Science & Technology
The Billion-Dollar Pollution Solution Humanity Needs Right Now | Stacy Kauk | TED
Could the same mechanism used to accelerate vaccine development work for spurring solutions to the climate crisis? Sustainability innovator Stacy Kauk introduces the billion-dollar fund to supercharge the carbon removal market, which would help build a new industry aimed at drawing down carbon pollution from the air and storing it safely. If you love watching…
Science & Technology
Where is all that a16z money going? | Equity Podcast
On this episode of Equity, Alex Wilhelm explores the massive, gobsmackingly big $7.2 billion worth of new funds from a16z and how the venture slowdown has not managed to impede the venture firm’s golden touch when it comes to fundraising. Equity is a show about the business of startups, where we unpack the numbers and…
Science & Technology
OpenAI plans new Tokyo office as Tesla faces layoffs | Equity Podcast
On this episode of Equity, TechCrunch’s Alex Wilhelm breaks down OpenAI’s plans for an office on Tokyo and Tesla cutting more than 10% of its global workforce. Equity is a show about the business of startups, where we unpack the numbers and nuance behind the headlines. New episodes drop at 7 a.m. PT every Monday,…
Science & Technology
Is fintech having a moment? | Equity Podcast
Welcome back to Equity. On this episode, the team discusses Tesla’s busy week and fundraising news at fintechs Ramp and Rippling. Equity is a show about the business of startups, where we unpack the numbers and nuance behind the headlines. New episodes drop at 7 a.m. PT every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Subscribe wherever you…
Escalating Rivalry Between the US and China Over Data
Hang Media’s Klein: Tech Giants Dominating Media Landscape
Paramount Should Consider Apollo-Sony Deal: Ariel’s Rogers
-
Science & Technology4 years agoNitya Subramanian: Products and Protocol
-
Wired5 years agoHow This Guy Became a World Champion Boomerang Thrower | WIRED
-
CNET4 years agoWays you can help Black Lives Matter movement (links, orgs, and more) 👈🏽
-
Wired5 years agoNeuroscientist Explains ASMR’s Effects on the Brain & The Body | WIRED
-
Wired5 years agoWhy It’s Almost Impossible to Solve a Rubik’s Cube in Under 3 Seconds | WIRED
-
Wired5 years agoFormer FBI Agent Explains How to Read Body Language | Tradecraft | WIRED
-
People & Blogs2 years agoSleep Expert Answers Questions From Twitter 💤 | Tech Support | WIRED
-
Wired5 years agoJessica Alba & Gabrielle Union Answer the Web’s Most Searched Questions | WIRED
Zachary Sielck
December 20, 2022 at 1:41 pm
“We are agnostic about that” -> translates to: We dont care how they capture carbon or whether it works. We just want to say we tried & get rich at the same time.
KJ
December 20, 2022 at 1:49 pm
Seems like an illogical way to approach the problem. Rather than removing carbon already there surely the answer is going to be innovation in clean energy capture.
lolmao500
December 20, 2022 at 1:55 pm
Oh honey guillotines dont cost that much
Draw For Animation
December 20, 2022 at 1:57 pm
*It would be good to increase the number of green spaces in cities and reduce the area of deserts. The video is very informative!*
AMER RAZA SAEDI
December 20, 2022 at 2:49 pm
good job stacy kauk
Brenda Pettus
December 20, 2022 at 2:53 pm
Assuring the producer that their product or service will be purchased at a set price assures that producers will find ways to inveigle consumers to buy new varieties of their product/service, whether it is good for the consumer or not. Using her example of vaccines, we’ve seen how some have benefits, but others have side-effects that can be life-damaging. Yet, the companies producing these vaccines have the backing of governments, as would anything to reduce atmospheric carbon, and now we have little choice as to whether or not we pay for those vaccines, beneficial or not. This sounds like a way for big business to get tax payers to pay for their R&D without risk to the companies. Tax payers are already carrying a heavy load. We don’t need to carry more for big business. They already have most of the money any way.
Vale Rocco
December 20, 2022 at 2:55 pm
Mmmmm maybe invert our time/money/energy in reducing! Carbon removal pff store it safely? Hasn’t even been tested in decades time and could lead to worst conditions in certain parts of the world. Sorry but no.
Tobias Persson
December 20, 2022 at 3:18 pm
wow… very interesting… but I feel sleepy when listening to her… so I missed everything
litakdg1
December 20, 2022 at 3:27 pm
Plants need carbon dioxide to live and we need oxygen from the plants.
peruvianLorena mogKevish
December 20, 2022 at 3:53 pm
Well >>>analyzed as always.
Doris Allison
December 20, 2022 at 3:57 pm
I Just read more about “ Jane Donre Crypto Program” on the internet. She is definitely a Pro.
Myles S. Brown
December 20, 2022 at 3:58 pm
Assets and lnvestment is that tiny Iine that separates the rich from the poor.
Sherri D. Odell
December 20, 2022 at 4:00 pm
The market is growing daily with new strategies and trading opportunities. Financial empowerment is our everyday chase and Mrs Jane has proven to be a part of this mission. her strategy is the very best .
Jürgen Decker
December 20, 2022 at 4:01 pm
Nice info, i appreciate your concern this will help a lot especially to the young bitcoin investors who have no or lesser knowledge on how bitcoin market works.
Justin W.
December 20, 2022 at 9:52 pm
man these are the most botted accounts I’ve seen in a while
Abigayle Gonzalez
December 20, 2022 at 4:03 pm
As a chemist carbon sequestering is always the first thing we talk about. Whether it’s carbon dioxide, nitrogen monoxide, Methane, hydrofluorocarbons or halogenated volatile organic compounds the chemistry is so poorly funded to do this at the massive scale we need. It will take factories of sequestering across the globe to make this profitable enough for companies to invest
SpaceManAust
December 20, 2022 at 4:39 pm
Tell me why they have based this all on computer models that have been wrong for over forty years.
The actual scientific data from space shows there is no change at all, this is a fact.
Flying fig
December 20, 2022 at 4:51 pm
Anyone who wants to walk the talk of making a difference, a real difference, should do one thing more than any other thing which would go straight to the leading cause and that is, no not switching to battery cars, etc.. but going vegan. Or stay blindfully ignorant .. a hypocrite.
Creators Child
December 20, 2022 at 5:23 pm
CO2…….. is Food for plants & trees! If they die, we die. 🤦🏻♀️
Socksquash 22
December 20, 2022 at 6:13 pm
To actually successfully sequester carbon for an extended period of time, we need to restore our damaged ecosystems through rewilding. Watch MinuteEarth’s video on why planting trees isn’t enough! It was really interesting.
Christian Soldier
December 20, 2022 at 6:18 pm
Well lady ,
you need to learn the ancient art of “volcano killing” because as many volcanoes as are blowing right now,
you’ll never catch up. But hey !! ain’t that the catch anyway ??
Christian Soldier
December 20, 2022 at 6:19 pm
Oooo !!!!
she did the creepy Joe whisper !!!
W. B.
December 20, 2022 at 6:21 pm
?how much co2 will you create if you spend 1 billion dollar
Christian Soldier
December 20, 2022 at 6:35 pm
And last but not least,,,,,
Watchers of this video are absolute fools to believe anything that has to do with “climate change” because it changes all the time.
The earth has it’s own protection methods and had survived since the beginning of time.
But manipulative men that group up and discuss ways to deceive the masses, are afoot and wealthy enough to produce methods to make you believe what they declare.
So !!! Be not deceived!!!
Do your due diligence.
John Coffey
December 20, 2022 at 11:03 pm
Iron Fertilization could remove CO2 cheaply. not that we need to.
It has taken 140 years for the average atmospheric temperature to go up 1 degree Celsius. It is going to take 5,000 more years for the polar ice caps to melt, but by the year 2100 we will run out of most fossil fuels, at which point a 2 to 3-degree increase in temperature might be mildly inconvenient for some, but it is not a global disaster. We only have 46 years of oil remaining. Humans are adaptable, and the proposed solutions are far more damaging. Getting rid of fossil fuels now, as some have proposed, will have a huge negative economic impact, especially on the poor. So-called renewables are inefficient and have huge environmental impacts of their own. By the time we run out of fossil fuels, we probably will have nuclear fusion which will solve most of our energy problems.
Something funny happens with the climate roughly every 100,000 years. Due to the Milankovich cycles which affect Earth’s orbit, we get an 8 to 15-degree spike in temperature followed by a 10 to 15-thousand-year warm period, which is then followed by a rapid decline in temperature and at least 85,000 years of mass glaciation. New York gets covered by a mile of ice. The “normal” state is very cold and all of human civilization arose during a brief 12,000-year warm period since the last cold period. During these 12,000 years, the planet Earth has gone from its maximum tilt, which melts glaciers, to halfway toward its minimum tilt, which will produce the next period of glaciation. We should already be in the cool-down cycle, except for those pesky humans who have warmed the planet a little bit. The preindustrial period from 1500 to 1850 was unusually cold and is labeled “the little ice age.”
Atmospheric CO2 has been in a steep decline for about 40 million years. Calcifying marine organisms are sequestering the carbon at the bottom of the sea. It got so low during the last period of glaciation that it was close to the level where all terrestrial plants would die from CO2 starvation. Sometime in the distant future, we are going to have to put CO2 back into the atmosphere to either prevent the next mass glaciation or to support plant life. We can do this with lime.
“We are not the enemy of Nature, but its Salvation..” – Patrick Moore.
Gage
December 20, 2022 at 11:43 pm
If you pull that much CO2 out of the air per year trees and plants of all kinds will die.
Zainab Ismail
December 21, 2022 at 12:40 am
Great Video. I was at a retirement seminar and the speaker spoke on how he quit his job after he made well over $950,000 PROFIT within 3months he invested $120,000. I just began investing and i will really appreciate any tips or helpful guide.
Terry Pasca
December 21, 2022 at 12:41 am
Steve A Korduckia is really different from every other Brokers , his honest and pro, earned 52.3BTC from him. Thank God i stopped hodling, i would suggest you try him
Zainab Ismail
December 21, 2022 at 12:42 am
@Terry Pasca there’s a lot of money to be made in crypto. I feel this new interest rates hikes could crash this economy. I’m looking out for a better investing strategy, I have a lump sum that inflation is steady eating up. Please do you mind sharing any means of reaching out to him easily? I’m really interested
George Anthony
December 21, 2022 at 12:42 am
My portfolio is very much diversified. I did it using copy trading system from a US regulated broker “Steve A Korducki it’s been a huge relief. Good earnings and little to no engagement at all on my part. His stock picks are outstanding. I can tell you he’s quite the genius in trading and portfolio diversification.
KlovisKanofTrad
December 21, 2022 at 12:45 am
Just watch a show on the oceans. It said the ocean can absorb CO2 at 42 million tons per square kilometer. Someone’s math just don’t add up. Everything absorbs it’s rocks water trees.
KlovisKanofTrad
December 21, 2022 at 12:48 am
Second of all the big companies that have benefited all these years making billions causing all this CO2 should give 10% of their earnings a year to clean up their mess. Quit nickel and diming the average person.
Mladin Alexandru
December 21, 2022 at 1:42 am
how about stop driving cars
CHT2
December 21, 2022 at 2:08 am
Sadly, too late.
uncle bobo
December 21, 2022 at 6:54 am
Hi how’s it going watching from Broomfield Colorado
axelasdf
December 21, 2022 at 7:03 am
Cobra effect?
None of your Damn Business
December 21, 2022 at 7:31 am
*And here we go with the narrative again 🙄🤦🏽♀️*
Riçe Experiment
December 21, 2022 at 3:51 pm
Wow, you got the big players on board. Should be easily able to offer 5 billion from that group of multitrillion dollar monopolies! Scale up way quicker.
Helena Richards 💖
December 21, 2022 at 8:15 pm
But but… In my country it is all about NO2… Not CO2… People have no idea what they are talking about.
Rosa Jenny
December 23, 2022 at 2:42 am
Most times, having knowledge or insight about a particular activity can as well be a pleasing exercise..I can boldly say that Forex and Crypto trading is one of the profitable currency exchange service that elevate investors and their financial status..
Deco Smith
December 23, 2022 at 3:25 am
Absolutely correct ma’am
Rory Blake
December 23, 2022 at 3:27 am
Hi! Just new from this Bitcoin world or whatever ! I’m just curious what website or cryptocurrency or app you guys are using? what’s advisable for beginners? And for Mrs Amber, is there anyway i could reach out to her using Facebook? Thank you in advance
Chloe Edwards
December 23, 2022 at 3:28 am
@Rory Blake It’s good you reach out to expert Amber Keyleigh Ward. If you can’t reach out to her or any pro then don’t get into investment except you’ve got a fat account tryna less..
Rory Blake
December 23, 2022 at 3:29 am
Thank you, I’ll send her a message now through whatsApp.
Tommy Albert
December 23, 2022 at 3:31 am
Cool insight, I appreciate am opportunity to get such knowledge on how to make income, I look forward to trading cryptos and making it an alternative source of income
Michael R
December 23, 2022 at 9:25 am
Thanks for sharing this❗👍🤙
John Champagne
December 24, 2022 at 2:00 pm
This is NOT better than charging high fees to extract carbon-laden material for sale as fuel, then sharing fee proceeds to all people. (This proposal appears to be a scheme for businesses to buy a way to signal their virtue. It’s a marketing gimmick.)
A fee charged proportional to extraction, with proceeds shared to all, is an eminently flexible policy. If the rate of reduction is not sufficiently rapid, we can raise the fee. (A fee pegged at the amount needed to bring the rate of extraction into alignment with what random polls show as average opinion as to what is acceptable will function like an auction of a defined number of permits.) Sharing the money to all will help to ensure broad support for the policy. (The poor, who buy less stuff overall, will be less impacted by price increases. The stipend will mean that they will come out ahead.)
This ‘Pay to sequester’ proposal is exactly the kind of government boondoggle that causes many conservative voters to oppose policy that aims to reduce carbon emissions.
Will magic be used to properly guess what price on carbon sequestration should be paid in ten-years-time to those who use various methods of fixing, so that the methods that tend to leak carbon over time will be paid accordingly (which means paid next-to-nothing)? The certification board looks like the kind of quazi-government entity that will be rife with opportunity for major players to try to game the process, by promoting their favorite ‘experts’ to the certification board, for example.
The certification board is an example of centralized, unaccountable authority that voters do not want more of.
The buliding of a trillion-plus dollars of new industrial plant is not needed if we charge a high-enough fee to extract carbon-laden material.
A high fee charged to extract fossil fuels (along with fees charged proportional to other kinds of adverse impacts on the environment) will make MSR / LFTR powerplants a highly-profitable manufacturing opportunity. These plants operate at such high temperature that they can be used to drive the combustion process in reverse. They can make fuels for transportation by *removing* carbon from the air (or from seawater). It would be a simple matterr to ‘tax’ some of this fuel production by requiring that 10% of what is produced be buried in unfracted oilfields. (Fracking is destroying the most straightforward method for carbon sequestration.)
We don’t need to tax producers of manufactured fuels. We could simply buy some of what they produce, either with public funds or with money clawed back from fossil fuel company profits that accrued in the days before proper extraction / emissions fees were charged. This method of sequestration would be more straightforward, more transparent and reliable than what might emerge as a result of an Advanced Market Commitment.